America's Debate hosts the best in news, government, and political debate. Register now to take part in the most civil and constructive debate on the Internet. Join the community, and get ready to be challenged!

However, as the creator of the vid admits, there's more to it than shown. An example I can think of right off is the impact of fraud, having been a victim of it while at MCI/Worldcom. Sure put a crimp on my income growth, productivity contribution and credit. But from a macro econ POV, fraud might not be that much of an economic mover, more like a symptom of general economic movement.

Julian, good point on the problem of fractional reserve lending not being addressed.

If there is no contract to pay back given money the money is a gift.

A market can exist without money. A market can not exist without goods. Money makes markets more efficient than without money. There is good money and bad money. Knowing the difference is part of basic economics. This important basic economic point is missing from the videl. Bad money in a market interferes with a market's potential for the benefit of some at the expense of others.

Government is neutral? Might as well throw in central banks as neutral. Both ideas are false. Another error in the video to not mention the problem of government and central banks distorting markets for their own ends.

You have a good point about fiat money, though money not subject to fractional reserve spending nor creation on demand would be fine even if the money was paper or digital.